On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Dima Pasechnik <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 3:06:04 PM UTC, William wrote: >> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 7:59 AM, Volker Braun <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > I've had people at workshops trying to compile Sage (never mind using >> > binaries) and they were SOL because their system bash was linked >> against the >> > wrong version of some library. If you can't compile it you surely can't >> use >> > it 6 times. >> >> David Roe had no trouble compiling Sage. It's wasteful to have to do >> it many times repeatedly. >> > > yet, David does not want to spend a bit of his time helping general Sage > development. > (we talk about perhaps 10 lines of code to change timestamps > in the right place, where the most time would go to navigating to the > right place...) > Come on Dima. I admit that I haven't been working on Sage as much as I used to, since I've been trying to write papers in order to find a job. But the claim that I don't want to spend a bit of my time helping general Sage development is completely ridiculous. I was involved in the work to transition to git, in rewriting the doctest framework, implementing coercion. And I'm about to organize a Sage Days (though perhaps you don't count p-adic computation as "general" Sage development). Are you just trying to take over for Nathann now that he's gone? > This is fine. But then he has 0 right to request enhancements from > volunteers, and you should not > have any pity on him for him having to read some new docs and spend extra > CPU cycles because > of a very, very rare in practice case of use for Sage. > I don't have an *expectation* that people to the work for me. But I think I have a right to *request* enhancements. I think that people who aren't involved in Sage at all have such a right. > (actually, as Volker points out, a case that might not work in practice, > as the server he's using is not powerful > enough for 6 teams of people hacking on Sage at the same time...) > William can speak more to the technical details for SMC, but the project supposedly has 11GB of RAM, 6 cores (I don't know what kind) and 53GB of disk space. We'll probably add more as people arrive for the workshop (I think that many participants are SMC customers and might be able to contribute). David >> > Also, your use case is a bit weird; Parallel installations on the same >> > server? >> >> It's David's use case for Sage Days 71. It seems to me like a >> reasonable use case for development. >> >> > Still, not a problem with rpaths. >> >> Cool, in theory. >> >> > >> > Finally, if you don't have enough memory to build the docs once then >> you'll >> > have a bad time running the tests when developing (you do run the >> tests, >> > right?). >> >> Sage is getting more and more unwieldy. I fear for its survival. > > > if the best Sage devs like you don't want to make their hands dirty and > work on the core Sage, including > build system, packages, etc, it might start to collapse indeed. > > >> >> - William >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "sage-devel" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
